Recent comments in /f/space
WhatADunderfulWorld t1_j6lu1sp wrote
Reply to comment by FanOfPeace in 2 big pieces of space junk nearly collide in orbital 'bad neighborhood' by jeffsmith202
Most would eventually fall to earth anyway. It’s more a problem of designing future satellites that are larger and have more functionality. Small satellites are so cheaply to design and shoot up there but it’s a huge issue when it only doesn’t one thing for one company.
They all need to be designed to fall to earth in 5 years or something.
AlpineCorbett t1_j6lu1hc wrote
Reply to comment by JazzRider in 2 big pieces of space junk nearly collide in orbital 'bad neighborhood' by jeffsmith202
We shot a satellite with an F-16 once. Turns out that's easier than getting rid of space junk....
Actually probably made that whole situation worse tbh
AlpineCorbett t1_j6ltxzy wrote
Reply to comment by Paradox_Dolphin in 2 big pieces of space junk nearly collide in orbital 'bad neighborhood' by jeffsmith202
If a problem can be fixed with a big ass laser, I assert that it is our duty, as humans, to do so. With vigor.
I can think of nothing more human.
Hampamatta t1_j6ltpxi wrote
Reply to comment by andrew_calcs in NASA tested new propulsion tech that could unlock new deep space travel possibilities by Creepy_Toe2680
Nuclear propulsion would likely need to be assembled in space and when needed, the spacecraft would need to attach to it in orbit. Critical malfunction tends to happen in atmosphere.
bremidon t1_j6ltp1n wrote
Reply to comment by MisinformedGenius in Number of manned orbital launches by year, 1961-2022 by firefly-metaverse
>What? The fact is that they were the first nation to launch an object into orbit, the first nation to launch a man into orbit, the first nation to launch an object into orbit around the Moon, and many other firsts. They had put two satellites in orbit by the time our first attempt blew up on the pad.
Well, your username fits at least.
Yes, those are all true, but also incredibly misleading, and apparently you failed to understand what I wrote.
Again, once more for the kids who came in late at the back: the Soviets would find out when the States were going to do something and then throw everything at beating them to that. Go back and read my previous post for more information. The summary is that they were never technologically ahead of the States; they were just better at using what they had to get those "firsts" you mentioned.
​
>The idea that they were behind us yet somehow would figure out what we were already doing and beat us to the punch despite our head start is nonsensical to say the least.
You may find it nonsensical, but that is probably because you are misinformed. Go back to your studies, actually read dry and boring historical records, and then it will make more sense.
Hampamatta t1_j6lthgq wrote
Reply to comment by a10t2 in NASA tested new propulsion tech that could unlock new deep space travel possibilities by Creepy_Toe2680
Theoretically ion engines are the pinnacle of propulsion. Far more efficient than normal combustion engines. And doesn't satellites already use small ion engines for realignment?
Hampamatta t1_j6lt7er wrote
Reply to comment by I-Pop-Bubbles in NASA tested new propulsion tech that could unlock new deep space travel possibilities by Creepy_Toe2680
Was about to say integza just recently made a video about this.
OrganicDroid t1_j6lszlm wrote
Reply to comment by crisptapwater in 2 big pieces of space junk nearly collide in orbital 'bad neighborhood' by jeffsmith202
That’s like saying, “why don’t I drive 100 miles to the nearest recycling center to recycle my cardboard box, instead of burning my cardboard box in my backyard fire pit?”
I.e. moon is still really far away and difficult to get to
ButtPlugJesus t1_j6lstfw wrote
Reply to comment by grchelp2018 in NASA tested new propulsion tech that could unlock new deep space travel possibilities by Creepy_Toe2680
Assuming the same relative time decrease, 3 years
[deleted] t1_j6lsmg5 wrote
Reply to comment by peter303_ in Aldebaran and the legacy of Arabic star names by AstronomicVerse
[removed]
Jobotics t1_j6ls3fu wrote
Reply to comment by mvpilot172 in NASA tested new propulsion tech that could unlock new deep space travel possibilities by Creepy_Toe2680
The detonation engine still uses both fuel and oxidizer. It isn't nuclear. The nuclear engine was just mentioned at the end as another engine being worked on.
LemonLime67219 t1_j6ls2h3 wrote
Reply to comment by Rao_Tzu in Aldebaran and the legacy of Arabic star names by AstronomicVerse
I know a two people named Rigel. Neither of them are likely to be your son, but it’s a cool name nonetheless.
[deleted] t1_j6ls1rs wrote
Shard_10 t1_j6lqgik wrote
I saw it in my backyard tonight it was magnificent!
CurtisLeow t1_j6lqfz8 wrote
Why is it getting awarded by Kamala Harris? Previous Congressional Space Medal of Honor recipients received the award from the President, not the Vice President.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Space_Medal_of_Honor
Chaff5 t1_j6lq1h1 wrote
Reply to comment by Creepy_Toe2680 in NASA tested new propulsion tech that could unlock new deep space travel possibilities by Creepy_Toe2680
Wow a 45 day trip to Mars... that's absolutely incredible.
[deleted] t1_j6louo8 wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in 2 big pieces of space junk nearly collide in orbital 'bad neighborhood' by jeffsmith202
[removed]
lustie_argonian t1_j6lou9t wrote
Reply to comment by trimeta in Perseverance Mars rover drops 10th sample, completing depot by IslandChillin
There are samples onboard. These are backups.
[deleted] t1_j6lok0u wrote
[deleted] t1_j6loivl wrote
Reply to comment by cjameshuff in NASA tested new propulsion tech that could unlock new deep space travel possibilities by Creepy_Toe2680
[removed]
trimeta t1_j6lobqy wrote
Maybe someone can explain to me: why does Perseverance drop samples, instead of keeping them stored onboard? Wouldn't it be easier for some future rover to just go to wherever Perseverance is and collect all the samples at once, rather than needing to trace Perseverance's entire journey to pick up the samples?
[deleted] t1_j6lmiv0 wrote
[deleted] t1_j6lmfk8 wrote
Reply to comment by FanOfPeace in 2 big pieces of space junk nearly collide in orbital 'bad neighborhood' by jeffsmith202
[deleted]
For_All_Humanity t1_j6lm62l wrote
Reply to comment by JazzRider in 2 big pieces of space junk nearly collide in orbital 'bad neighborhood' by jeffsmith202
Multiple countries already have that capability. Of course, the proliferation of abilities to do it cheaply might be a concern, but really for the good of us all we need to have the means to quickly and cheaply remove debris from orbit. It is inevitable that something breaks or there’s an accident or there’s debris that needs to be moved before it collides with something important. Or perhaps in the aftermath of a war which may see certain satellites annihilated we’ll need to do cleanup efforts.
AlpineCorbett t1_j6lu49x wrote
Reply to comment by crisptapwater in 2 big pieces of space junk nearly collide in orbital 'bad neighborhood' by jeffsmith202
The moon is really, really far away. By comparison these are within arms reach.